Footballer Marcus Rashford fights for free school meals

[planetgeli]

Can I just remind you what our kids get at PRU. Posted upthread on Oct 22nd.

Anyway, about this £15. Our FSM pupils get lunch which allegedly worth, or costs, £12.50 a week, £2.50 a day.

For your £2.50 you get:

1 thin white crap bread sandwich with inedible ham or cheese.
1 flap jack (best option by miles) OR 1 chocolate cupcake OR 1 piece of fruit of questionable provenance/quality
1 tiny plastic cup of orange juice.

And that's it.

Vouchers they can spend themselves? Infinitely preferable to that crap. So let's not just campaign for FSM through holidays and lockdowns, let it be known what my pupils actually get for that. Because it's appalling.

So this is nothing new. Yes, it's appaling. But yes, it's been happening as the norm for quite some time now.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

 

[cybershot]

Rashford: something 'going wrong' with free school meal deliveries

Footballer holds talks with catering firm after criticism of ‘unacceptable’ packages

www.theguardian.com

 

[two sheds]

View attachment 248450

Any thoughts teuchter? Nothing to see here, move on. Not a whiff of corruption you feel?

 

[ska invita]

Does anyone know what the lead campaign group is for keeping the + £20 Universal Credit level?

 

[brogdale]

One key issue here is the 'opposition' stance on this; they'll bleat that the kids deserve better/the firms involved should do better, but they won't question the structural causes and privatised 'remedies' for very good reason.

 

[teuchter]

Any thoughts teuchter? Nothing to see here, move on. Not a whiff of corruption you feel?

As I understand it, the criteria for "corruption" are:

• company does work involving public money
• some kind of connection between that company and the tory party can be found.

I expect you can find that for most large companies in the UK. So, sure, on that basis, there is widespread corruption everywhere.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Does anyone know what the lead campaign group is for keeping the + £20 Universal Credit level?

The Labour party.

Just kidding, obviously.

 

[SpookyFrank]

One key issue here is the 'opposition' stance on this; they'll bleat that the kids deserve better/the firms involved should do better, but they won't question the structural causes and privatised 'remedies' for very good reason.

School catering was privatised under Blair IIRC.

 

[Artaxerxes]

School catering was privatised under Blair IIRC.

Wasn't there something about "all schools must provide meals but we're also gutting school meal funding and canteens" at the time, or at best not providing the resources to allow all schools to have canteens?

 

[Anju]

Did they give any reasons for not just giving people the £30, other than the 'they'll spend it on drugs and fags' line usually wheeled out in such circumstances?

 

[dessiato]

I’m genuinely sickened by this appalling abuse and corruption. I’m so angry that it is difficult to find words

 

[Santino]

As I understand it, the criteria for "corruption" are:

• company does work involving public money
• some kind of connection between that company and the tory party can be found.

I expect you can find that for most large companies in the UK. So, sure, on that basis, there is widespread corruption everywhere.

This, but unironically.

 

[Artaxerxes]

I expect you can find that for most large companies in the UK. So, sure, on that basis, there is widespread corruption everywhere.

Yes.

We call it lobbying to differentiate our good corruption from the bad corruption elsewhere.

 

[eatmorecheese]

So if your kids go hungry some cunt's making money from it.

I hate them so much. This is just evil.

 

[cybershot]

Did they give any reasons for not just giving people the £30, other than the 'they'll spend it on drugs and fags' line usually wheeled out in such circumstances?

It would have cost a lot less to roll out that way as well, but I guess no-one's buddy gets rich that way!

 

[NoXion]

As I understand it, the criteria for "corruption" are:

• company does work involving public money
• some kind of connection between that company and the tory party can be found.

I expect you can find that for most large companies in the UK. So, sure, on that basis, there is widespread corruption everywhere.

Don't you think that the difference between £30 and the pitiful spread that people get for that money is an inexcusable piss-take? I mean just fucking look at that shit and honestly tell me that they are not being greedy profiteering cunts.

 

[Jeff Robinson]

Bloodsucking parasitical vermin! Converting needed nutrition for starving kids into profits. Capitalism is barbarism

 

[Crispy]

As I understand it, the criteria for "corruption" are:

• company does work involving public money
• some kind of connection between that company and the tory party can be found.

I expect you can find that for most large companies in the UK. So, sure, on that basis, there is widespread corruption everywhere.

You get a medal, comrade

 

[NoXion]

Funny how you got right-wing cunts on Twitter who claim to be able to feed a family for a week on a fiver, yet when the supposedly more "efficient" and "competitive" private sector becomes involved, we get shit like this.

 

[teuchter]

Don't you think that the difference between £30 and the pitiful spread that people get for that money is an inexcusable piss-take? I mean just fucking look at that shit and honestly tell me that they are not being greedy profiteering cunts.

This question is written to make it look like I have said that I think the pitiful spread is fine and nothing to see here.

Why's that?

 

[NoXion]

This question is written to make it look like I have said that I think the pitiful spread is fine and nothing to see here.

Why's that?

Because you're splitting hairs about whether this is corruption, when it should be fucking obvious that it is. This kind of tedious shit from you is mildly amusing when you pull it on non-serious threads, but when you do it in threads like this, it frankly makes you look like a bit of a cunt.

 

[two sheds]

Because you're splitting hairs about whether this is corruption, when it should be fucking obvious that it is. This kind of tedious shit from you is mildly amusing when you pull it on non-serious threads, but when you do it in threads like this, it frankly makes you look like a bit of a cunt.

Although I did draw him into it apologies

 

[not-bono-ever]

Emergency food parcels are now a legitimate profit making opportunity . Fuckers. How difficult would it be a for a government to actually use its vast resources and actually do this themselves rather than farming it out to carpetbagging cunts? Disgusting

 

[not-bono-ever]

Yeh but market = competition = economies of scale = win

 

[likesfish]

Sent compass an abusive email not much but hopefully they get loads

 

[Lord Camomile]

Honestly, I know we've already heaped all the praise and superlatives on him, but this bloody lad. Such admirable dedication and drive, but also really admire the way he conducts himself generally and articulates the issues. This isn't just "oooh, those poor kids, lets raise some money or something!", he understands and can talk about the details, what it really means, but still manages to do that simply and concisely. "Clinical", some might say

Spoiler: Full Twitter thread

 

[teuchter]

Because you're splitting hairs about whether this is corruption, when it should be fucking obvious that it is. This kind of tedious shit from you is mildly amusing when you pull it on non-serious threads, but when you do it in threads like this, it frankly makes you look like a bit of a cunt.

In what way am I splitting hairs?

If you want to say that anything that involves a company that can be connected to individuals in the government is de facto corruption, fine. You can make general points about how procurement takes place, what influence lobbying has, and what the consequences are of a system where political parties can accept private funding. That's all fine too and I'd probably agree with most of it. But if you want to make an argument that in this specific instance, there is some kind of very specific corruption going on - for example, the company was knowingly chosen over others who would have been more competent or appropriate, as a result of some kind of direct intervention by someone to bypass the normal procedures (however inadequate those procedures might already be, by default) then surely you have to come up with some better evidence than something as generally applicable as "one of the owners is somehow connected to the government".

But, apparently, making a point about that kind of distinction is sufficient to justify making out that I've said something I haven't.

And anyway I came onto this thread to answer a question directed at me. The question (which also presupposed my answer) was a vague one about whether I thought there was a "whiff of corruption". So I answered it.

 

[Sue]

And maybe a small point but calling them 'hampers' is obviously intended to convey a certain image. I'd say most people think of hampers as containing luxury food and treats so the complete opposite of what we're talking about here. FFS.

 

[Lord Camomile]

And maybe a small point but calling them 'hampers' is obviously intended to convey a certain image. I'd say most people think of hampers as containing luxury food and treats so the complete opposite of what we're talking about here. FFS.

It is a small point, but absolutely indicative of the thought processes behind all these bloody things.